On Tap: Free Birth Control; Misguided Catholics
Nov 1, 2010 Political
A little discussion is going on with regard to the health care bill known as Obamacare. Seems that birth control will be available to women at no cost to them. The article claims that the birth control will be free but it is not free because someone (taxpayers) must pay for it.
I do not have a problem with contraception and if people want to use it that is their choice but I have a problem with them not having to pay for it. I do not want to pay for their birth control. It is not my responsibility to pay for their birth control, it is theirs.
Senator Barbara Mikulski, the troglodyte from Maryland, says that it is clear that family planning was meant to be included as preventive medicine. She wrote that amendment so she should know what she meant but the larger question is, why didn’t she just write it in plain language so there would be no confusion? She wrote it so she could have clearly spelled it out. Instead, she failed to mention it because she knew it might have led to opposition that would have derailed Obamacare.
Here is an idea. If you want birth control just keep a picture of Mikulski in your bedroom or carry it with you and look at it when you feel like having sex. That will be enough to remove any desire to have sex.
The Catholic Bishops oppose the “free” birth control because they consider birth control to be a life choice and not preventive medicine since pregnancy is a healthy condition.
The Catholics have no say in the matter. That religion’s leaders take positions based on how they feel at any one time. They continue to support politicians who support abortions including partial birth abortion, the brutal murder that occurs seconds before a child is born. The doctor stops the kid in the birth canal, cuts a hole in his head and sucks his brains out. A dead, brainless child is delivered.
The Catholics continue to support people who are in favor of these things. The Catholics supported Obama and he believes in allowing children who are born alive after an unsuccessful abortion to be left alone to die.
Where were the Catholic leaders on that one? Supporting Obama.
The Catholic leaders have no say in any of this. They continually do things contrary to their teachings for political gain. I guess they, like Saul Alinksy, believe the ends justify the means.
No matter what, the leaders of the Catholic church are one of the last groups of people I would turn to for guidance on moral issues.
“Free” contraception is not free. We taxpayers have to pay for it.
The picture of Mikulski is much cheaper.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: catholics, contraception, lies, mikulski, Obama, obamacare
Catholics Need Not Apply
Jan 15, 2010 Political
Martha Coakley either does not want the job for which she is running or she is incredibly stupid and does not deserve it. I am betting on the latter rather than the former.
Coakley has had an ad out bashing Scott Brown and saying he voted to deny care to rape victims. This is not true. Brown included a conscience clause that says if a provider is opposed to certain treatment (morning after pill, abortion, etc) then that person does not have to provide that care. The person has to already have the status on file and the victim has to be offered the care from someone not opposed to giving it and at no additional cost.
Coakley was interviewed recently and she was caught by surprise with a question regarding the conscience clause.
Under the conscience clause, workers in health-care environments ranging from doctors to maintenance men can refuse to offer services, information, or advice to patients on issues like contraception, blood transfusions, etc..if the workers are morally against it.
This is how Martha Coakley handled a question about the conscience clause:
Ken Pittman: Right, if you are a Catholic, and believe what the Pope teaches that any form of birth control is a sin. ah you don’t want to do that.
Martha Coakley: No we have a separation of church and state Ken, lets be clear.
Ken Pittman: In the emergency room you still have your religious freedom.
Martha Coakley: (……uh, eh…um..) The law says that people are allowed to have that. You can have religious freedom but you probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room. [emphasis in original]
First of all there is no such thing as separation of church and state. The Constitution says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Secondly, a hospital or other health care facility is NOT the state (maybe it will be under Obamacare) so this is an inane point for her to make.
I wonder if Coakley is aware of the number of Catholic hospitals across this country or that Catholics established some of the earliest ones. Many nuns become nurses to take care of people. Are we to believe that they should not be allowed to work in an ER because of their beliefs?
I wonder if Muslims had an objection to seeing a woman who is not a wife naked would Coakley say they should not work in health care?
It is amazing that the Constitution states that no religious test shall ever be required for any office but Coakley believes that perhaps we should exclude those whose religion forbids certain practices from working in certain venues.
A commenter at the source made a good point. The person wrote something like did Coakley then go to what naturally follows? A Catholic should never vote for a Democrat…
If a religious conviction should keep people from doing certain jobs that have aspects which conflict with their religious views then certainly they should never vote for people whose views do that.
The Democrats are already looking at this as a defeat and are working on ways to shield Obama.
I read that nearly 40% of the people in Massachusetts are Catholic. I do not know what is going to happen but ticking off this large a segment of the population does not seem very smart.
Source:
Washington Times
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: catholics, coakley, conscience clause, election, Massachusetts, scott brown